starcraftfandomcom-20200213-history
User talk:PRISON KEEPER
Images When uploading images, please follow the image policy when naming files. (Also, please don't use all capital letters.) And please source the images. Thanks. Kimera 757 (talk) 21:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC) If I may also add: please make an attempt to search through the images already uploaded to avoid duplication. Also, please refrain from uploading images that are so small that details are very difficult to pick out. Meco 06:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC) *Check the image category, the old image tree, and the list of uncategorised images to check for duplicates before uploading. And it is imperative that you give the sources of your images. Note that sourcing is essential so we know if its from an official source, as opposed to being fan art, and so we can rename the file according to our image policy. Meco 13:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC) Block If you would review the ' ' you will find that you have been blindly uploading images that we already have. Just because the border, or the size, is different doesn't make the core subject of the image different. You are also strongly advised to familiarize yourself with the ' ', especially the parts concerning file naming and sourcing. Meco 13:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC) Mutalisk This is the third time that you have added "Mutalisk (Character) (Playable Character in Starcraft: ghost)" (or something to that effect) to the Mutalisk article and it has been third time it has been removed for want of a source. The next time you add it without a source you will be banned for a period of time. Addendum: Right, the fourth time I'll let go because you will not have received this message yet. Meco 15:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC) Cerebrates If you were more aware of the contents of the article, you would find that player cerebrates are dealt with in the section prior to "Other Cerebrates". Also, it does no good to make links to "cerebrate" in the cerebrate article. Finally, if you checked the revision history for the cerebrate article, you will find that "Segal" and "Targ" have been removed again and again because of a lack of sources (sound familiar?). Meco 13:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Blocked Prison Keeper, you (and all your unnamed accounts) have been blocked for one month for failure to follow the wiki's policies. In addition, not communicating with the administrators works against you. While blocked, you can still edit your talk page so you can talk to the administrators, but that's it. Kimera 757 (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Editing of hero templates Please don't add minor characters like the Mar Sara Magistrate to the heroes templates. We never see that character, nor do we even know their name. Also please don't change character names to things like "Cerebrate-lieutenant", that character is nameless. Kimera 757 (talk) 15:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC) Please leave the quotations. Cerebrate and Executor are not names. The quotations signify they are titles and that the character was referred to that way. It is unnecessary to put "Unnamed Executor" etc. Don't do it again. Your behaviour, especially the "Cerebrate-lieutenant", is suspiciously familiar to an IP account we recently had trouble with. Reply here ASAP so we know you're getting this message and you understand what is expected. Meco 19:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC) Please don't move widely-used templates The templates have those names for a reason. Tassadar's forces use the Akilae flag in the StarCraft: Board Game (and we know they're in communication with Blizzard). The vast majority of the time, the template will refer to Tassadar's forces, not Akilae forces. Kerrigan now controls the Zerg Swarm, and it hasn't been called Kerrigan's Swarm since the end of the Brood War. This is why changing the Overmind flag template to the Zerg Swarm template is inappropriate. Kimera 757 (talk) 19:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC) And please don't spam the Akilae Tribe page. Any more edits like that will result in another block, a longer one than previous. Kimera 757 (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC) Character info box names Do not add additional identifiers to the infoboxes. They are not needed there. I believe we've been through this before. - Meco (talk) 18:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC) Magistrate Edit We have a speculation policy. In the rare instances it's allowed, it goes on a page's Notes section. Matt Horner being the magistrate is impossible. Just read his biography, either here or on the official site. It is not possible. This is why speculation should be avoided, or at least discussed on a talk page or forum first. Also, do not break references. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 16:34, September 19, 2010 (UTC) Images Prison Keeper, you need to follow the image policy. Where did you get the Pan-Terran Marine image? PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 14:22, November 11, 2011 (UTC) Nouns Do familiarize yourself with the noun usage policy. Names of species and most unit names are common nouns. - Meco (talk, ) 22:11, June 1, 2013 (UTC) Re: Skins For the skins, do you have a linked page, as in, a page with the skins present rather than the skins by themselves? Easier to reference, better to use when it has an accompanying context. Also, remember to source such things within articles. Providing a link in the edit summary isn't enough.--Hawki (talk) 06:37, November 15, 2013 (UTC) Re: Reawakening On the creation of such an article, it may be created if: *Blizzard has acknowledged its existance in some form (their Arcade spotlights are an example of this, but a Blue post would suffice). *It has been acknowledged by an impartial third party (e.g. Rogue Star got an article by virtue of being spotlighted by Kotaku, which is such a third party). *Note that StarCraft fan sites don't count as an impartial third party as by their very nature, they're impartial. In essence, the article would need a source that validates its existance rather than the source itself, if that makes sense. If the article passes this criteria, then it may be created. Following things are/aren't allowed: *Images from the game may be uploaded (categorized as fan images) *The article itself may be of substantive size, using its own existance as a source (as in, don't need to source every statement, as it can work on the basis that info is accurate to it within itself (if that makes sense). *No articles may stem from it (e.g. no unit articles - you can list units, but none of them can recieve their own page). Night of the Dead is an example of this - it's substantive, but everything on it is confined to its own page. Ended up getting a wiki of its own. So, in essence, find a source of acknowledgement, and the article may be created. But on this wiki, it can only be confined to a single article.--Hawki (talk) 12:43, June 5, 2014 (UTC) :The "top x" position wouldn't justify an article as those positions would change reguarly. As for an Italian channel, I'd need a link to see. However, I doubt it - the wiki is more or less English based, with aspects from other languages having their own wikis (e.g. we decided against creating Japanese voice actor articles due to the lack of relevance).--Hawki (talk) 13:56, June 5, 2014 (UTC) ::Looking at the site...sorry, I'm not sure how 'official' it is. If it's a channel confined to YouTube, it might fall into the fansite category. Features the campaign, but not sure if it's enough. Sorry if this comes off as obstinate, but for hopefully understandable reasons fan maps are an iffy issue.--Hawki (talk) 21:54, June 5, 2014 (UTC) :::Sure. The sandbox can be as detailed as you like. In the event of the mod meeting the wiki's inclusion criteria, the sandbox article can be transferred.--Hawki (talk) 05:33, June 6, 2014 (UTC) Images Again, please follow the . Your images have to be sourced and designated. The same applies for pages.--Hawki (talk) 12:10, November 11, 2014 (UTC) Protoss Units I've moved the table into the War Council page. Any further updates to the table can be done there. The units will still need pages over time though - as per HotS, it's a far easier way to convey the info (namely all the zerg variant strains).--Hawki (talk) 13:09, November 11, 2014 (UTC) Dates I'll hold off editing for now, but under the assumption that the recent edits stem from Children of the Void, where do the dates come from? Far as I saw there was no statement as to when the Hierarchy was founded or when the story itself takes place.--Hawki (talk) 09:11, October 14, 2015 (UTC) ::Legacy of the Void is not placed in 2506? So I thinked the date of the story too is that date, if I'm wrong, can be put the date 2505/2506? Like Zagare, is date she born in 2500/2501--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 09:29, October 14, 2015 (UTC) :::Zagara's birth date comes from Heroes of the Storm (4 years, which could apply to either 2500 or 2501 given that HotS occurs in early 2505). LotV does take place in 2506, but from what I recall, the only indication in the story is that the Armada will be launched in the near future. That can still be a matter of years.--Hawki (talk) 09:50, October 14, 2015 (UTC) ::::But if we consider Mohandar survive in the original timeline (the timeline where Kerrigan dies) and in the new timeline (where Kerrigan survive) he die, this mean the events of Children of the Void is AFTER the end of WoL (when Raynor kill Tychus to make Kerrigan survive, creating the new timeline), so Mohandar die bewtween october 2504-early 2506.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 14:25, October 14, 2015 (UTC) Re: Colour It's possible, but I kind of doubt it for the following reasons: *The epilogue aside, material in LotV establishes that the Dominion is still using red as its de facto colour (cutscenes, mission artwork, etc.) While there's different colours within missions, that can usually be attributed to distinguishing it from Moebius Corps (red) and the Void shades/Tal'darim (black and red). *The epilogue missions don't occur that long after the main campaign (Karax tells Artanis about Kerrigan's message immediately after the end sequence). Under the premise that the Dominion is red throughout LotV proper, I don't see them changing to blue in so short a timeframe (and again, Raynor's Raiders I think are at least part of said force, if not the basis of the force - I'd need to check the lines again). *In the credits sequence, when it shows the "Dominion golden age" section, you can still see red flags that use the current Dominion icon. It's not necessarily indicative of force colour, but it does show congruence between old and new Dominion iconography. *The UNN banner is indeed correct, but I wouldn't really cite it as evidence per se. It's possible, but not definitive. *This is circumstancial, but the Dominion forces in Nova Covert Ops have a black and red colour scheme. This doesn't necessarily mean that this is indicative of the Dominion Armed Forces as a whole (e.g. the player is stated to be in command of a black ops unit), but it's still red rather than blue. Ultimately, the only real evidence for the Dominion's colour being blue is the use of blue terran forces in LotV, which is iffy because of how colour schemes can work in the game, and in the context of Raynor's Raiders and other factions that have red elements. In contrast, Dominion forces are distinctly red in LotV proper, and red appears to be a far more prominent colour post-LotV (non-missions) outside the UNN bar. Ultimately, I'd like to at least wait until Nova Covert Ops. But as for now, I feel there's far more evidence for the Dominion being red rather than blue, so to speak.--Hawki (talk) 08:42, February 16, 2016 (UTC) ::Ok, understand :)--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 11:11, February 16, 2016 (UTC) Re: Tal'darim Units Well, depends on the content and how he responds. There is a precedent for using developer interviews with individual users (e.g. Talken Campell) as cited evidence. Just let me know if it happens - if it's something like a PM, what will probably happen is that the PM will be copy-pasted into a blog post, and the post used as the link.--Hawki (talk) 07:30, September 12, 2016 (UTC) Nova Every Terran commander has the missile turret, it is a universal structure. There is no reason to list it on Nova's unit list unless you want to also include the Barracks, Factory, Starport, etc. DrakeyC (talk) 13:19, October 24, 2016 (UTC) :Open the game, go to Co-Op, open Nova's unit tab, there is the Missle Turret. Only because NOW all Terran have it don't mean EVERY Terran will have it, in the others commanders was added ALL the units in the unit tab. The pages are made considering THAT OFFICIAL unit tab you can find ingame. You don't like it? Ok, but is OFFICIALLY SINGNED IN HER UNIT TAB. So accept it.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 13:52, October 24, 2016 (UTC) ::First, do not shout at me. Second, I will refrain from reverting you as a discussion has been started by another user on Nova's talk page. Come and take part. DrakeyC (talk) 15:10, October 24, 2016 (UTC) Commander colors I looked through the Korean site Namu.wiki (and Koreans usually do not lie) and found which commanders what colors correspond to Co-op. On the left - the names of the commanders, on the right - the corresponding colors. Here are the names of the commanders in the order of the table: 1) Raynor; 2) Kerrigan; 3) Artanis, Nova; 4) Swann, Fenix; 5) Zagara; 6) Vorazun; 7) Karax, Abathur; 8) Alarak; 9) Stukov; 10) Dehaka; 11) Han and Horner; 12) Tychus; 13) Zeratul. Here is the list of colors in the game: NemesisHunter97 (Talk) 11:43, January 3, 2019 (UTC) :Here is an english version list of colors: As a result, it turns out the following list of commanders and their respective colors: 1) Raynor – Blue 2) Kerrigan – Pink (Magenta) 3) Artanis, Nova – Sky Blue 4) Swann, Fenix – Orange 5) Zagara – Navy Blue (Dark Blue, Violet) 6) Vorazun – Purple 7) Karax, Abathur – Yellow 8) Alarak – Scarlet (Dark Red) 9) Stukov – Light Pink 10) Dehaka – Light Grey (Cyan) 11) Han and Horner – Dark Purple 12) Tychus – Light Brown (Which is now in the articles) 13) Zeratul – Aquamarine NemesisHunter97 (Talk) 13:20, January 3, 2019 (UTC)